FW: What Drunken Dotun never told you? advice from Cherie and Ed Mulhouse
FW: What Drunken Dotun never told you?:
Anonymous Remailer via dizum.com
16:56 (2 hours ago) 14 August 2023
to me, shantanupanigrahi, ravina@olivesolicitors.com, enquiries@martintolhurst.com, VOPA@gmail.com
Dear Shan,
Mulhouse asked for this to be sent to you, he has had a formal exchange with Victim.Justice@kent.police.uk and has conceived a strong dislike for your "so called lawyers".
The reason we withhold our real names from you is that you cannot be trusted to be reasonable but will instead publish with wild abandon everything everywhere indiscreetly, which is part of why you may end up with a serious criminal record or even imprisonment. There is no justice.
Tolhurst is included because they are one of the few firms in Kent prepared to assist in civil litigation against members of the profession, though apparently not the police.
VOPA is included because you publish everything anyway so nothing is lost by letting them know we too know how to wage a war against state oppression, tyranny and, as you put it, torture and terrorism.
Affectionately,
~~CHERIE
FORWARDED "What Drunken Dotun never told you?"
I know you are the proclaimed and experienced Master of the Arts of Escapologies but you must take care and tread softly. Even though some of the causes for action or events predated 25 May 2018, you must use only the General Data Protection Regulation ((EU)2016/679) to legitimise your SARs. Read ico.org.uk/for-the-public/your-right-to-get-copies-of-your-data The maximum fee you can be charged by the recipient of the SAR is two pounds. SARs apply neither to individuals nor exempted organisations like law enforcement and the court and judicial systems.
It is thus clear that you must take care to whom you address them.
I supply a hypothetical. Your bail conditions ban you from contacting Ms. Jones in any way. Ms. Jones works for, paid or unpaid, full-time or part-time or as an agent or subcontractor, a non-exempt organisation, say a firm of lawyers, an incorporated entity, a regulator or other quango, a political party or informal group, a club, a medical practice, the National Health Services, etc Hypothetically, uou reasonably believe Ms. Jones holds some personal information relating to you.
Do not address the SAR to Ms. Jones, but to the organisation, whatever it is, for the attention of Ms. Jones. It is not a licence to abuse. Read ico.org/for-organisations/sme-web-hub/frequently-asked-questions Unless you are banned in your bail conditions from contacting the organisation itself, which except in extraordinary circumstances would appear to be an abuse of police powers and
invalid, void per se, nothing in the restrictions would stop you serving an SAR on the organisation itself for the attention of Ms. Jones.
This may appear to be a trivial distinguishment to you but you are, no matter what you may think, not a lawyer. It is not a trivial.
When serving the SAR, do not use any of your mysterious emailing methods. A direct traceable email from you accompanied by a paper letter sent with Proof Of Postage will do nicely. The address should be the registered one or ones for the organisation or department, not a personal one for the individual, unless of course they happen to be one and the same. I would take the precaution of photographing or scanning the addressed envelope to cover you should the hypothetical Ms.
Jones be as duplicitous as you suspect and try to get you into hotter waters.
Word the SAR civilly and with care, sticking to pro formas you can find on ico.org, and do not make humorous or enigmatic statements that can be argued to be threatening or harassing.
Short. Sweet.
Good luck, you may need it. Suppress your deep desire to lose and thus become a martyr.
Most certainly explore why your appointed solicitors have failed to properly advise you about your rights and tactics. Token compensation will be more readily obtainable here than from other, more resistant and competent, sources. If you see the litigation record of their senior, an immediate explanation presents itself. But it is possible they have been got at as you
probably surmise.
Salutations.
Mulhouse